With the 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing Monday, former President Bill Clinton is playing a starring role in the liberal effort to draw what the New York Times calls "parallels between the antigovernment tone that preceded that devastating attack and the political tumult of today." The short version of the narrative is: Today's Tea Partiers are tomorrow's right-wing bombers.

On Friday, Clinton spoke at a symposium on the bombing organized by the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, founded and run by John Podesta, the former Clinton White House chief of staff who also directed the Obama transition. The theme of Clinton's remarks was that movements like the Tea Party, characterized by extreme right-wing rhetoric, could lead to political violence. In the last few days, news accounts in the Times ("Recalling '95 Bombing, Clinton Sees Parallels"), Newsweek ("Hate: Antigovernment extremists are on the rise -- and on the march"), and ABC News ("Watch your words") drove home Clinton's point. "This is a legitimate thing to do," the former president said, "drawing parallels to the time running up to Oklahoma City and a lot of the political discord that exists in our country today."

More more! The best part is at the bottom. I suppose that what BY is saying that if the GOP merely reacts strongly to what the current liar-in-chief does, they'll end up on the wrong side of the argument as far as the voters are concerned. I think that the GOP or at least some prominent Republicans have learned a little since then and are trying to bring the debate right back to the guy who whispers the accusations in the first place. Obama's tried to Oklahoma City us since day one, and he's used the usual WoT bureaucracy and rhetoric to search for ways to grab headlines and look for potential threats to exploit. Apart from outright lies about peaceful tea party protesters that his allies in the media have promulgated, he has little to show for it. Doesn't mean of course that the MSM won't try to tie the next villian/wacko that comes down the pike with the GOP (we know they'll try). And we certainly know the drill when December 2010 arrives. Obama and co are running on borrowed time right now.

Bill Clinton and his henchman, J. Reno, in burning down the Branch Davidian Compound and killing men, women and children violently and without justice, laid the groundwork for reciprocity that resulted in the Oklahoma City bombing.

I just love this! When protesters against the Bush administration carried protest signs showing Bush's bloody head on a pike (sounds like advocating the assassination of the president to me), that's ok. But now that we have a Democrat administration, free speech is bad unless it's their free speech. They intend to control the information flow on the Internet to control the debate. Yeah, right. Oh, and protests are now considered terroristic and a threat to the state... I saw this coming when I was in college.

As First Lady, Hillary had no legal authority to order anyone to do anything. On top of that Reno let it be known the FBI had prior knowledge of the Davidians suicide pact. Legally speaking, that means Hillary is as guilty of premeditated murder as David Koresh(sp?).

It’s true that some of the left’s agenda could come back to bite them later. But in supposed havens for free speech such as universities, what really matters is the political views of the dean, his tenured entourage, and his contributors (first among them being the federal and state government bureaucracies) are.

A few articles lately pointed out that a possible SCOTUS nominee was all for banning ROTC at government funded institutions like Harvard. But the decisions a judge makes can have unintended effects on seemingly unrelated cases. Just ultimately depends on how consistent the thinking of SCOTUS justices is.

Hey Slick, remember when you turned the Army loose on American citizens in Waco Texas, thus murdering men, women and children of the Christian faith? How dare you blame the good American patriots for the poor gov official’s paranoia.

Losing ROTC would be a real detriment to the armed forces, as large number of our officer cadre in the Army, Navy and Air Force are ROTC graduates. My understanding is that land grand colleges and universities are obligated by their legislatively established charter to offer ROTC. My daughter is a graduate of U of Alaska ROTC. UAF is a land grant school.

President Bill Clinton spoke at a nationally televised memorial service in Oklahoma City a few days after the attack. In the wake of the 1994 midterm elections—when Republicans gained a majority in Congress—the Democratic President’s national popularity had sunk to an all-time low.

However, Clinton’s emotional meeting with the victims’ families in Oklahoma City and his moving speech at the memorial service won praise throughout the country.

Following the attack, the spectre of homegrown, antigovernment extremists also cast scrutiny on the partisan rhetoric of House Speaker Newt Gingrich and members of the Republican Congress who spoke bluntly about the dangers of a large federal government.

Gingrich’s popularity began a long decline that ultimately led to his forced resignation as House Speaker in November 1998. In contrast, after the Oklahoma City speech, Clinton’s popularity grew rapidly, and in 1996 he won reelection to a second term as president.

Clinton: “To all my fellow Americans beyond this hall, I say, one thing we owe those who have sacrificed is the duty to purge ourselves of the dark forces which gave rise to this evil. They are forces that threaten our common peace, our freedom, our way of life.”

[Article] "This is a legitimate thing to do," the former president said, "drawing parallels to the time running up to Oklahoma City and a lot of the political discord that exists in our country today."[Emphasis added.]

The fact that Slick the Unspeakable found it necessary to assert that it is a "legitimate" thing to do, reveals mens rea on his part, and admits of the probability that it is in fact not a legitimate thing to do, but instead is wholly a smear, a canard, and a witting political roorback.

Sure, but if he can get away with calling it “legitimate”, he can get away with calling it “legitimate”. Even better for him if the GOP can get bogged down challenging the “legitimacy” of all of it instead of calling a spade a spade.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.